Crossing the Floor

shrewsbury is the bellwether of the country's vote robin

Yay! Come in Charles Kennedy, your time is NOW*!

*or Spring 2005, possibly

Irrespective of whether one agrees with Paul Marsden on the conflict in Afghanistan (and I don’t) I was not impressed with his decision to go running to the papers after his spat with the Whips. Smacks of the very spin, and obsession with the media he now lambastes the Labour Party for.

I dont know, I liked that: live by the sword, etc.

So Marsden's moved across because of the bullying, not because his deep-held beliefs led him to? Or he no longer believed in Labour policies (esp. ref. war, hmm, were the Lib Dems very against the war then?) and would have moved across anyway and the bullies were the last straw? Ringing endorsement or damning indictment?

Goodness knows I wish the Labour Party would sort itself out. The continuing image of control freakery (true or not? who among us can tell for sure?) is a disaster. The continual flood of right-wing rhetoric fronm ministries who aren't generally engaged in implementing right-wing policies (a few horrible examples aside) is bizarre and counterproductive.

Actually, that's Gravesend (now known as Gravesham politically) in Kent, the only seat to have been won by the winning side in every election from 1945 onwards. I guess the last time Shrewsbury wasn't held by the party of government was October 1974, if it was Tory then.

I share Tim's concerns with the proviso that Blunkett has *always* been as small-c conservative as the "norms of acceptability" line suggests, even in c.1984 when the press (not just the Mail and Sun) was shit-stirring about the People's Republic of South Yorkshire.

Have to say that the act of crossing the floor is a betrayal of his constituents voters. If they had wanted a liberal democrat MP they would have voted for one. If he's switching on principle, his principles should be tested in a by-election.

As for Blunkett, I remember seeing him on Question time talking about Freddie Mercury and how his *dissolute lifestyle* had brought his death upon him. My jaw duly dropped on hearing that coming from a labour MP and not a minor Tory backbencher

Marsden's defection statement in full (link in the Question now overtaken by events BTW)

This has clearly been coming, as a quick flick through past BBC News online stories shows. I've nothing profound to say about this. David Davis' remark that Lib Dems are 'all things to all people' (a couple of pro-European Tories also defected to LDs recently) is a cheap shot. But what were Marsden's options? Do a Tony Benn and bang your head against a brick wall for years? Resign the whip and be ignored for the rest of this Parliament? No, joining another party grabs the most headlines, and will keep you in the spotlight hereafter - if you're any good as a Parliamentarian that is.

I don't blame him, really. I switched to voting lib dem after all my life (add old fart northener accent here, if it amuses U) voting labour. ALL MY LIFE!!! etc etc

I see what Nick Robinson means on the BBC site about Kennedy *needing* Tory and Labour defectors to claim that the Lib Dems are the party of the moment, on the rise, but could it just be that they *are* that party, and this reflects the current drift of UK politics? I certainly agree with most of Marsden's statement, and I think he's come through this with his credibility intact, if not enhanced.

I agree with Billy that there should be a by-election when MPs defect, and it's worth recalling that, of the four Tories to defect (three to Labour, one to the Lib Dems) since 1995, all but one of their constituencies remained Tory at the next election - but then Stratford-upon-Avon, Leominster and Witney are exceptionally safe Tory territory, and the LDs gaining Devon West and Torridge after Emma Nicholson had crossed the floor to join them was bound up with their general ascendancy over the Tories in the West Country. As for Blunkett on Mercury, that's exactly what I was getting at.

Billy, people *should* be voting for the candidate that represents their views rather than parties (i know in this presidential day and age it's so much horse crap, but there you go). Apparently simon "sandals" hughes wasn't too hippy, sorry happy, about it, he reckons pissed off mps should be "independant" rather than join another party, and he might well have a point..

He does. In fact I was thinking a few hours ago that "traditionalists" and "radicals" would be more appropriate divisions in the Commons these days than party political ones, and better in tune with the dividing lines as far as most people are concerned in Blair's modern Britain. Blair himself seems to think more in these terms than Tory / Labour / Lib Dem ones.

"Blair's modern Britain" = intended more sardonically, "Blair's beloved modern Britain"

luvvit when paxman said to marsden - ^your ex-labour colleagues think you're off your head^

and pple slag me fer dumbing doon!

Yeah, fair enough Steve but it doesn't work that way in our parliamentary system. If people have voted for him on the basis of *his* beliefs rather than for his party then he'll have no problem winning his seat back again in a by-election.

honestly what were his options. he was obviously unhappy belonging to an organisation that he so obviously disagreed with and had (to all appearances) treated him harshly. could he have gone independent?